About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
. they also want us to begin to balance the books just like we did under president clinton with a sensible, balanced approach, one that led to increasing wages across the board, increasing productivity, increasing employment, and a budget surplus in 2000 before president george w. bush took over. last year we cook a step in that direction. we cut $1 trillion in federal spending, we don't hear much about it particularly from the other side of the aisle. but what it means is that every discretionary program will see less funding for the next decade, which will have a huge impact on my state and every state in this country. now, if we're going to cut spending on education, research, and transportation to the tune of approximately $1 trillion, i think most americans recognize that the other side of the equation has to be considered. revenue needs to be part of the balance plan to reduce the debt. and the simple fact of the matter is that virtually every expert panel and commentator has said clearly in order to reduce the deficit to a sustainable level, revenues have to go up. it's a matter of
president clinton to cut tax rates. many democrats opposed him then because the tax cuts were unfair, favoring the highest-income americans. to overcome that obstacle, the republicans resorted to a parliamentary technique, budget reconciliation, a maneuver that allowed for passage of their tax cuts but forced them to expire after 2010, at the end of the ten-year budget window. so we scroll forward to 2010. as 2010 ended, president obama and many democrats in congress, including myself, wanted to extend the tax cuts for middle-class families but let rates on income above $200,000 for an individual and $250,000 for a family revert to the clinton era levels. our senate republican friends filibustered that effort, refusing to allow the middle-class tax cut without a tax cut for the highest incomes as well. their hostage strategy worked that time and the president and senate democrats reluctantly agreed to extend the tax cuts for two more years. so now the two years is up and these tax rates are again set to expire. that's why senate democrats passed the middle-class tax cuts act in july.
now they will have the time to schedule a round of golf with bill clinton. [laughter] >> that's an inside joke, folks. >> let me turn to the subject at hand. i believe we're dealing with an important question in the south caucasus region which reps in a complex of the both regional alliances and conflicts, bitter rivalries, degrees of western orientation, desperate economic trajectories, and a potential venue for instability and even violence. in terms of you in the south caucasus region from the perspective of the subcommittee it is important to note some of our strongest instruments, the euro atlantic institutions of nader, the european union, have a weak presence, and, therefore, are not as relevant as they are in the balkans. ultimately this means that europe and the united states have less leverage in the region. this allows other countries in the region to compete or political, economic and military influence in the region. i'm looking for to hearing eyewitnesses discuss this issue today. really want to hear what you have to say. i believe that armenia, azerbaijan and ge
to run for office is like having -- asking bill clinton to be monogamous. [laughter] like asking an activist to bathe. i could go through 10 of them that i will stop there. however the people you're dealing with once every two years in once every four years is like a romance novel. running for office as the romance novel. they are into it. their cars run for office. when you see them they have bumper stickers. is like a whiny to know how they feel all the time. i'm going off topic here. i was interviewed today, one of the worst interviews ever. she asked me a softball question and then can you tell me what the book says and i said can you give me specifics? there were 40 seconds of silence. if you can just tell me what you're talking about. actually bashing liberals. u.s. for specifics and it's clear that she had not read the book. you can't argue with the liberal when they don't even want to show up to do the homework. anyway, i kept going okay, this is a journalist. i feel like blah, blog, blog. so i'm going okay i think it's only the liberals that they like. i might be wrong b
, and secretary clinton moves throughout the region as well as secretary panetta, and the amount of activities i do and my forces do is a prompt jump than what we did in the past, and we're looking for opportunities to do more exercise. we are doing more of those things already, and that's viz l to the allies. i think it's visible to the partners, and i feel it visible to the region. we oftenment to jump to, well, where's the next aircraft carry your or the submarine. that's the signal. we will, over time, as you've heard secretary panetta say, rebalance towards the pacific, and i mentioned opening remarks. we're rapidly moving the most capable assets into the region because of the ballistic missile defense threats we face and those things, so it's about a holistic approach, and what i do on the military side is just one aspect of it. it's got to be tie into the economic side, what's happening in the diplomatic side, and so we're working hard that accomplishes this strategy. >> a quick question. you started to do or plan to do rotational b-52 deployments to northern australia. >> well, you've se
that president was in cambodia right after the election. he was in burma. secretary clinton moved widely throughout the region as does secretary panetta. and the amount of activities that i do and my forces do have been a prompt jump in what we've done in the past, and we're looking for opportunities to do more exercise. we're doing more of those things already. i think it's visible to our allies. i think it's visible to our partners. not to be invisible to the region. we also want to jump, where's the next summary our aircraft carrier, that's always the sake of. and we will, over time as you heard secretary panetta said, we will rebalance our navy towards the pacific, and i party mentioned in my opening remarks, we are rapidly moving our most capable assets in the region because of some of the ballistic missile defense will be facing of those types of things. so i think it's not about one thing. it's about a holistic approach, and what if you on the military side is only one aspect of a. it's got to be tied to what's happening in the economic side in what's happening in the diplomatic s
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)